2024-09-03
France has revolutions in 1789. Then again in 1830. And then 1848
Napoleon III stages a “self-coup” in 1851 and rules as an effective dictator for the next 22 years
By 1870: widespread urban/rural polarization over Napoleonic rule and everyone is afraid of the Prussians.
… This does not go well. By 1870:
Paris is besieged (and not ready for it)
Napoleon the 3rd captured in Sedan
The French Second Republic is dissolved and an interim government ends up negotiating a humiliating armistice with Prussia.
Following the armistice:
A conservative dominated national government is elected, and relocates the capital to Versailles
Parisian radicals (supported by the mostly working-class national guard forces) seize military equipment and declared a parallel government organized under democratic/socialist ideals (the commune)
The government at Versailles regroups, and, by May, overtakes the city and massacres the Communards
The Communards retaliate by looting and burning the city
The howling, swarming, ragged crowd which invaded the Tuileries… did not lay hands on any of the objects that excited its astonishment, and one of which would have meant bread for many days. - Gustav LeBon
Crowd psychology is not like individual psychology
Crowds allow anonymity and lack of accountability
People lose their will and self control
They’re left highly suggestible (like hypnosis) and will behave in ways they’d never on their own
Since Europe is democratizing, crowds now rule.
Crowd psychology is not like individual psychology
Crowds allow anonymity and lack of accountability
People lose their will and self control
They’re left highly suggestible (like hypnosis) and will behave in ways they’d never on their own
Since Europe is democratizing, crowds now rule
The study of group psychology sees a revival in the mid 20th century (why?)
More nuanced versions of LeBon’s general thesis gain influence in the 1960s (even among people who otherwise reject his politics)
Why did we see a sudden surge in revolutions, civil wars, and rebellions in the late 20th century?
Why do conflicts sometimes happen even under improving conditions?
Crowd psychology is distinct from individual psychology. Crowds are “transformative”
Crowds are more driven by emotion than reason, and are spontaneous rather than deliberate.
Crowds are mobilized by social strain and societal breakdown, and participants are more likely to come from groups where loss of self is more attractive.
Are there scenarios where this makes sense? Are there scenarios where it doesn’t?
Why does this start to see sustained pushback in the later 60s and 70s?
Norris Johnson (1987) study of Who concert disaster
Apparent acquisitive panic actually an effort to escape a crowd collapse
Victims describe being picked up, or groups forming protective cordons
Evidence of gender norms around helping behaviors
I lost my footing and slowly but surely began going down…I grabbed someone’s leg and whoever it was told three other guys about me. They all pushed me up… [and] helped me stay up until we got through the door
McPhail notes: small groups show just as much evidence of suggestibility as large ones.
Sustained collective resistance often highly organized and sophisticated, and people maintain some self control even in a riot.
Forms of collective action are historically contingent and change as incentives change.
Participants know each other! Being part of a social network makes you more likely to protest.
Violence and deprivation are not neatly correlated (at a minimum, strain alone can’t explain rebellion)
Collective behavior tradition remains influential, but see serious challenges in the 1960s.
Next class we’ll talk about some of the models that attempt to replace it.